Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Evan Mecham/archive1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] Evan Mecham
Article dealing with one of the more unusual political figures of the 1980s. Has been previously nominated on FAC with a more recent Peer review. Self-nom. --Allen3 talk 14:46, 24 October 2006 (UTC)
- Support Nobody seemed to be interested, so I let myself be the first one. After a quick read through - informative, interesting, looks thorough. One thing bothers me, though... only one image? --Ouro 15:28, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- The single image is limiting, but unless some free images of Mecham are found there is little that can be done. I have made multiple searches and had a request at Wikipedia:Requested pictures for several months. To date every image located has been under tight copyright restrictions, thus forcing the use of a single fair use image. --Allen3 talk 16:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- I understand. Well, in a situation like this very little can be done. Too bad all your efforts and work brought nothing. --Ouro 17:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Have you tried contacting the Arizona State Archives or a similar body and seeing if they have anything? Newyorkbrad 01:20, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- I understand. Well, in a situation like this very little can be done. Too bad all your efforts and work brought nothing. --Ouro 17:02, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- The single image is limiting, but unless some free images of Mecham are found there is little that can be done. I have made multiple searches and had a request at Wikipedia:Requested pictures for several months. To date every image located has been under tight copyright restrictions, thus forcing the use of a single fair use image. --Allen3 talk 16:24, 25 October 2006 (UTC)
- Follow-up to my support vote. Apart from the photo the rest is FA-quality if you ask me, only one thing: the first paragraph of After office reads: In 1995 Mecham became chairman of the Constitutionalist Networking Center, a group attempting to create grassroots group called the Constitutionally Unified Republic for Everybody. The purpose of this group was to advocate political candidates supporting a strict interpretation of the United States Constitution. Is it possible to reword this to reduce the amount of groups here? --Ouro 12:30, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- The sentences now read:In 1995 Mecham became chairman of the Constitutionalist Networking Center, a group attempting to create a grassroots organization called the Constitutionally Unified Republic for Everybody (CURE). CURE's purpose was then to advocate political candidates supporting a strict interpretation of the United States Constitution. --Allen3 talk 13:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Nice. Sounds way better. Thanks. --Ouro 13:42, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- The sentences now read:In 1995 Mecham became chairman of the Constitutionalist Networking Center, a group attempting to create a grassroots organization called the Constitutionally Unified Republic for Everybody (CURE). CURE's purpose was then to advocate political candidates supporting a strict interpretation of the United States Constitution. --Allen3 talk 13:25, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Object. Every sentence in the opening paragraph needs fixing.
- First sentence is a problem: "Evan Mecham (IPA: [ˈmik.ɑm]; born 12 May 1924) is a former American politician and the 19th Governor of Arizona." Tension between "former" and "the 19th". Perhaps insert "was" after "and"?
- Second sentence: "Mecham worked most of his life as the owner of ..." FOR most of his life?
- Third sentence: "while becoming a perennial candidate making periodic runs for political office"—This is very strange.
- "During his time as governor,"—Why not just "While governor"?
Can you get someone to run through the whole text thoroughly? Tony 07:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- The lead has been reworked and a new copyedit has been performed on the article. As for your recommendation that I "get someone to run through the whole text thoroughly", multiple peer review requests and requests to the Wikiproject covering the topic have had very limited success in finding editors and reviewers willing to go over the article. Even this FAC nomination has only had limited participation despite the request having been active for 17 days. --Allen3 talk 19:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- Try researching the edit histories of similar FAs and others. Identify contributors who effectively copy-edited, particularly during the FAC process. Ask them each to spend 20 mins of their time on this one, nominating a particular section, perhaps. Or ask them to do the whole lot. Tony 01:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- The FAC instructions require all objections to reference a specific rationale that can be addressed. I have been making period attempts to gather additional feedback on the article, both on and off Wikipedia, for close to a year. Unless you have some evidence that additional contributors willing to assist in a timely manner exist, it is clear that your recommendation in nothing more than an attempt to add further delay and not an actionable objection. If you have any actionable items that have not yet been addressed please provide them, but please do not add any more objections that can not be addressed. --Allen3 talk 02:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly what part wasn't actionable? Tony 10:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- You request that I "get someone to run through the whole text thoroughly". As detailed above, multiple good faith efforts have been made through the available Wikipedia channels. Unless you have some special method to overcome Raul's 3rd law, such a request is not actionable as there is no way to force some other contributor to perform the requested effort. If you do have an effective method of obtaining additional skilled contributors when needed, please share your method with the community as it would be a boon to all seeking to improve Wikipedia. --Allen3 talk 11:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- I'm not going to play this game. I've provided more than enough evidence that the text fails 1a. It's your problem. If you're saying that you can't edit well enought to satisfy the criterion, and can't find anyone else who's interested in doing so, the nomination fails. Simple. Tony 11:49, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- You request that I "get someone to run through the whole text thoroughly". As detailed above, multiple good faith efforts have been made through the available Wikipedia channels. Unless you have some special method to overcome Raul's 3rd law, such a request is not actionable as there is no way to force some other contributor to perform the requested effort. If you do have an effective method of obtaining additional skilled contributors when needed, please share your method with the community as it would be a boon to all seeking to improve Wikipedia. --Allen3 talk 11:21, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Exactly what part wasn't actionable? Tony 10:03, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- The FAC instructions require all objections to reference a specific rationale that can be addressed. I have been making period attempts to gather additional feedback on the article, both on and off Wikipedia, for close to a year. Unless you have some evidence that additional contributors willing to assist in a timely manner exist, it is clear that your recommendation in nothing more than an attempt to add further delay and not an actionable objection. If you have any actionable items that have not yet been addressed please provide them, but please do not add any more objections that can not be addressed. --Allen3 talk 02:49, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- Try researching the edit histories of similar FAs and others. Identify contributors who effectively copy-edited, particularly during the FAC process. Ask them each to spend 20 mins of their time on this one, nominating a particular section, perhaps. Or ask them to do the whole lot. Tony 01:35, 11 November 2006 (UTC)
- The lead has been reworked and a new copyedit has been performed on the article. As for your recommendation that I "get someone to run through the whole text thoroughly", multiple peer review requests and requests to the Wikiproject covering the topic have had very limited success in finding editors and reviewers willing to go over the article. Even this FAC nomination has only had limited participation despite the request having been active for 17 days. --Allen3 talk 19:55, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
- Now, to reinforce my opinion that the whole text fails 1a, let's go through the lead that you say above "has been reworked".
- There are still problems with the clash of tenses in the first sentence: "Evan Mecham (IPA: [ˈmik.ɑm]; born 12 May 1924) is a former American politician and was the 19th Governor of Arizona." Why not "Evan Mecham (IPA: [ˈmik.ɑm]; born 12 May 1924) was an American politician and the 19th Governor of Arizona." Then all we need to address is the category problem: if he was a state governor, you don't need to tell us that he was an American politician—one is a subset of the other. The opening sentence is still a mess.
- "As governor, Mecham was plagued by controversy and he became the first U.S. governor to simultaneously face removal from office through impeachment, a scheduled recall election, and felony indictment." It may appear a small point, but I'll say it anyway: remove "he". Should "a" be inserted before "felony"?
- "His victory during the 1986 election began with a surprise win of his party's nomination followed by a split of the opposition party during the general election." Um ... does "victory" refer to the fact that he won the election? If so, "during" is not the right word ("in"). You refer to "his party" and "the opposition party", but we still don't know whether he was a Democrat or a Republican. You have "during the 1986 election" and "during the general election", raising issues of repetition and lack of cohesion ("general" = the same, 1986 election?)
- "While governor, Mecham became known for a number of statements and actions that were ..."—You could remove "a number of", which adds nothing at all to the meaning.
- "causing damage to the state's tourism industry by the cancellation of multiple conventions."—"Damaging" would be better than "causing damage". "Through" rather than "by". What do you mean by "multiple"? Several simultaneous conventions?
- "A rift between the governor and fellow Republicans in the Arizona Legislature also developed after a series of ..."—Remove "also" as redundant, unless there were other rifts between him and his party colleagues that you're not telling us about.
- "charges of obstruction of justice and misuse of government funds"—Insert "the" before "obstruction" and before "misuse".
- "A later criminal trial acquitted Mecham on related charges." I'm pretty sure it should be "of", not "on".
- "and made his final runs for Governor and to the U.S. Senate"—run to the Senate?
Just about every sentence in this supposedly revamped lead requires fixing. A cursory look through the rest of the text shows many further problems. This is why I contend that the article fails 1a. Tony 10:24, 13 November 2006 (UTC)
- Object. Does not conform to WP:LAYOUT, appears to heavily rely on one source (Watkins), raising questions of neutrality, problems with WP:WTA throughout, possible weasle words throughout (example, "While governor, Mecham became known for statements and actions that were widely perceived insensitive to minorities." — does the source use these words?) and prose issues as raised by Tony. Sandy (Talk) 15:32, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
-
- The "Notes", "References", "Further reading", and "Bibliography" sections have been reordered to comply with WP:LAYOUT. Was there any other section of this MOS overview that you spotted an issue with?
-
- As to your concerns about neutrality, the article's reliance on the Watkins book is based primarily on Watkins providing the most detailed reliable source currently available (a 396 page book vs single chapters available in other book sources). If you look at the actual source of the article you will notice that many of the more inflammatory claims have additional sources commented out. This was done specifically to demonstrate a consistency of heme through all available reliable sources.
-
- For your concerns about the listed example the text of the cited source says:
-
-
-
- "Mecham's insensitivity toward minorities, his high-handed political activities, and his inability to recognize his shortcomings often made him a laughingstock. He gave new meaning to the term "gadfly," thank to his mostly unsuccessful forays for political office. His appearance and personality made him the butt of numerous jokes. A slight man at five-foot-six and 138 pounds, he wore an ill-fitting hairpiece. Sam Steiger, who was special assistant to Mecham, said most of the criticism of the governor had to do with his style, "like his toupee, his inappropriate grammar ... the idea that he's overly simplistic ... his unwillingness to compromise.
-
-
-
-
-
- "Nonetheless, he had a loyal following among the extreme right wing of the Republican Party, senior citizens, and members of the Church o fJesus Christ of Latter-day Saints, of which he was a member." — Johnson, James W. (2002). Arizona Politicians: The Noble and the Notorious. University of Arizona Press, 36. ISBN 0-8165-2204-0.
-
-
-
- It should also be noted that the sentence in question is located in the lead and the body of the article provides further details and source citations. If you can suggest a better wording that does not violate WP:BLP or venture into intentional character assassination, please feel free to make appropriate updates. My primary concern was to provide Mecham the benefit of the doubt whenever possible while still being true to the available sources. It should also be noted that it is not just this one source that is strongly worded. Even without seeing the article text, titles such as "When Evan Mecham Talks, Arizona Shudders" (Business Week), "Up in Arms in Arizona" (New York Times), "Inside the Wacky World of Evan Mecham" (U.S. News & World Report), and "Evan Mecham, Please Go Home" (Time) should give you some idea of the public's general view of Mecham. With the exception of self-published books by Mecham and his supporters, the former governor's press is consistently negative. --Allen3 talk 18:43, 23 November 2006 (UTC)
